about SIL and DS1's Bris (circumcision) ?

[imlikeaironingboard]

I'm Jewish (Liberal) and DH counts himself as secular Jewish (as does all of his family).
His DBro (my BIL) married out - not a 'big' thing with them due to the whole non practicing/secular thing.

I'm due to give birth to DS1 (DC2) in a week.

They do not have children and it is only DH and BIL as siblings. our DC1 is a DD.

Both DH and BIL are circumcised.

She told us tonight that she would not be coming to DS1 Bris. The idea of doing that 'disgusts' her.

AIBU to be really upset and to think that she should have realised that marrying into a jewish family secular or not would mean that these sort of things would happen?

This has really really upset me - I have never got a hint of her feeling like this before.

Sharrie you have it round the wrong way - it is well-known that circumcision is more likely to desensitise the penis than to heighten sensitivity actually.

There is nothing wrong with circumcising for medical need, but (IMHO) it should only ever be done under GA and by a qualified surgeon if and when a plain need arises. When my son was 'done' I asked the urologist about the likelihood of complications and long term problems and he said that his 'bread and butter' business was repairing damage done by clumsy ritual circumcisions on newborn babies, but that procedures carried out by proper surgeons on older boys or men for medical need very rarely led to complications in later life.

Sharrie there are loads of threads debating the rights and wrongs of this practice. Am on my phone or I would link to some.

I don't think the discussion is really about the advantages/disadvantages of circumcision. It may/may not increase sexual pleasure and improve hygiene... but the decision to perform it, when not for medical reasons, surely should fall on an free, consenting adult male, and not on a baby.

About religious traditions... well, what exactly would be the problem in letting the child choose whether to get circumcised or not when he is older? A baby is not "Jewish", or "catholic", or "protestant". A baby has no religion. Surely the circumcision would have much more meaning if it was freely decided upon. I wouldn't be happy at all to learn my parents chopped bits off me when I was a baby because of their religion...

Sorry sharrie, didn't mean to sound so bossy

I'm certain that in less than a couple of decades that ritual circumcision will be illegal and we will look back on it with the same horror as the other idiotic religious rituals that have thankfully died out.

Your sil could have been more tactful. But why should she be? We are talking about performing a painful and unnecessary procedure on someone too young to consent. Why should she pretend she was OK with that?

She doesn't have to pretend to agree. Surely she could just say she doesn't agree with the practise and leave it at that?

Gallowees, that is highly unlikely given it has been showed to reduce the risk of HIV transmission by 75% (female to male) in at least two WHO-endorsed large scale studies. Which means it is about as efficient as the BCG vaccine is against TB.

Ditto for HPV transmission.

The WHO supports circumcision in certain settings/circumstances. The WHO condemns FGM in any setting.

sharrie I think the situation is this: If you are circ'd as a baby/child (as most people are) your glans is uncovered 100% of the time for many years before you reach an age where you have sex. Therefore the tissue covering the glans thickens over time, and is not so sensitive to touch/friction as it would be for a man whose glans is mostly covered by foreskin, and only exposed for sex or cleaning.

However, for someone who has been circumcised after they have reached sexual maturity they may (for the first year or two at least) find that they are more sensitive down there, beacuse they are still getting used to the feeling of the glans being uncovered all the time. Perhaps the lightest touch/brush against a woman's body during a cuddle would lead much more quickly to an erection that previously. I am fairly sure that over time though, the opposite would be true. Imagine if the skin on your inner labia became the same as the skin on your outer labia (ie. less fragile and more able to deal with exposure/friction without getting sore)- I imagine you would lose some sensitivity there.

She doesn't have to pretend to agree. Surely she could just say she doesn't agree with the practise and leave it at that?"

she did!

She didn't, she said it disgusted her, very different, very judgemental/emotive.

That's exactly what I thought seeker!

Well we don't know whether she just announced her disgust in general terms without being probed, (which would have been perhaps slightly uncalled for) or whether she was invited to justify/explain her reluctance to attend by the OP.

So she's allowed to say she doesn't agree with the practice, but not why?

In which case she would have been entirely justified in saying that it disgusted her.

I think in families some diplomacy can come in handy, that's all.

Primfacie - how many babies die as a result of unnecessary ritual circumcision?

Especially in countries where HIV is prevalent.

Unnecessary circumcision is brutal, especially when it's not under GA in an operating theatre with fully qualified doctors and nurses.

I think you're going to have to let the word "disgusted" go. Yes, it's strong, but this is an issue which arouses strong feelings. It doesn't mean you and your SIL are never going to be close again.

I think you need to accept that her feelings against circumcision are as much as part of who she is as your feelings in favour of it are a part of who you are. When she fell in love with your BIL she didn't make a conscious decision to choose a Jewish family, she chose him for him. I would imagine she and he have already had the circumcision discussion pre-marriage. You may find you're having to deal with your own emotions when you have a nephew and he isn't circumcised.

My sister told me she would never speak to me again if we circumcised our son. Fortunately, we weren't considering circumcision.